of the victim. The testimony of PW7 shows that the victim was subjected to sexual

intercourse and it was bleeding from her private part.

15. The testimony of PW11-Dr.Birbal Pawar, who is the Medical officer who

examined the accused, shows that there was abrasion over the glans penis of the

accused. The medical certificate of the accused was issued by PW 11 (Exh.59). PW 11

has categorically stated that the abrasion on the glans penis is found in forceful

penetration cases and attempt to forceful penetration. The said abrasion was less than

12 hours. The testimony of PW11 supports the case of the prosecution. Thus, the

prosecution has established that the victim was subjected to sexual intercourse and it

was none else than the accused who had committed the said act.

16. In case of State of H.P. v. Sanjay Kumar alias Sunny reported in 2017(3)

Mh.L.J. (Cri.)(S.C.) 68, the Hon’ble apex Court has held in paragraph 31 as under :-

“31. By now it is well settled that the testimony
of a victim in cases of sexual offences is vital
and unless there are compelling reasons which
necessitate looking for corroboration of a
statement, the Courts should find no difficulty to
act on the testimony of the victim of a sexual
assault alone to convict the accused. No doubt,
her testimony has to inspire confidence.
Seeking corroboration to a statement before
relying upon the same as a rule, in such cases,
would literally amount to adding insult to injury.

The deposition of the prosecutrix has, thus, to
be taken as a whole. Needless to reiterate that

the victim of rape is not an accomplice and her
evidence can be acted upon without
corroboration. She stands at a higher pedestal
than an injured witness does. If the Court finds
it difficult to accept her version, it may seek
corroboration from some evidence which lends
assurance to her version. To insist on
corroboration, except in the rarest of rare cases,
is to equate one who is a victim of the lust of
another with an accomplice to a crime and
thereby insult womanhood. It would be adding
insult to injury to tell a woman that her claim of
rape will not be believed unless it is
corroborated in material particulars, as in the
case of an accomplice to crime. Why should
the evidence of the girl or the woman who
complains of rape or sexual molestation be
viewed with the aid of spectacles fitted with
lenses tinged with doubt, disbelief or
suspicion? The plea about lack of corroboration
has no substance.”

17. In case of Aman Kumar and another v. State of Haryana, reported in

(2004) 4 SCC 379, the Hon’ble apex Court has held as under :-

“It is well settled that a prosecutrix complaining
of having been a victim of the offence of rape is not an
accomplice after the crime. There is no rule of law that

her testimony cannot be acted upon without
corroboration in material particulars. She stands on a
higher pedestal than an injured witness. In the latter
case, there is injury on the physical form, while in the
former it is both physical as well as psychological and
emotional.”

18. In my considered view, the learned trial Judge has not considered the

above aspects of the matter. Since the accused was arrested on the same day, and

the victim had named him, when she met her father in her house, there is no question

of mistaken identity of the accused. The incident had taken place in the broad daylight

the victim was aged about 10-years old at the the relevant time and her testimony

inspires confidence and, as such, there is no question of false implication of the

accused in the instant case. The injury on the private part of the victim which was

bleeding injury clearly indicates that the incident had taken place at the relevant time.

There was no reason for the father of the victim to falsely implicate the accused in such

a heinous offence by putting the reputation of his daughter and his family at stake. So

also, it is not at all the case of the accused that there was any sort of rivalry between

the father of the victim and the accused so as to falsely implicate him in such a

heinous crime. In case of rape, neither the victim nor her parents would like to

implicate any other person than the real culprit. The learned trial Judge ought to have

considered all those aspects in its right perspective.

19. No doubt, the victim belongs to “Mahar” Scheduled Caste. However the